The first duty
of love
is to listen.
- Paul Tillich

Some discussions require a referee in the form of a moderator, a mediator, a facilitator, an arbitrator, or another form of intermediary.

This intervention is often very important. Even with the best of intentions, some people have difficulty carrying on a fair discussion. Because of their intense involvement in the situation, they may present their point in a more than forceful way. In such cases, even the finest discussion partners may require intervention. This is not a sign of weakness. It is a recognition that the partners want to carry out the discussion, in the fairest possible way.

The dynamics of larger groups almost inevitably require a leader.

Participants in personal or on-line discussion groups, chatrooms, or forums often tend to veer from their original agenda. This is not necessarily bad if they only want to have a friendly chat.

However, when they assemble in order to resolve an issue or to respond to a query, then a moderator should be appointed, in order to assure that the topic does not deviate from the group's focus.

In some cases, the membership of e-mail groups is able to moderate itself. In such groups, the membership may be offended if a moderator is asked to handle the job that they have been carrying out effectively. Those participants correctly feel that they are mature enough to deal with their own issues successfully.

In other cases, it is wise to have a moderator.

That moderator has various tasks:

• To keep track of the current discussion as well as previous discussions
• To remind participants of their roles in the discussion
• To assure that the discussion is held in a friendly, yet businesslike manner
• To come to a clear conclusion that is understood and accepted by all of the participants.